I never had a chance to watch a Murray game yet this tourney. First 2 Federer matches only.

thejoe

06-25-2009, 01:59 PM

Federer for me. But this is so subjective, you won't get an answer.

All-rounder

06-25-2009, 01:59 PM

Federer by a long mile

malakas

06-25-2009, 02:01 PM

the difference is so abysmal there shouldn't even be a poll about this.

theduh

06-25-2009, 02:02 PM

I'm a first Rog and second Andy fan. You know my answer.

JeMar

06-25-2009, 02:07 PM

Hey guys, which one is naturally brighter? White or black?

theduh

06-25-2009, 02:08 PM

^^^ Neither, it's silver.

Docalex007

06-25-2009, 02:09 PM

There is no comparison... yesterday I watched Roger Federer play on Centre Court in person and I was blown away at his tennis. It's incredible to watch live before your eyes.

malakas

06-25-2009, 02:12 PM

There is no comparison... yesterday I watched Roger Federer play on Centre Court in person and I was blown away at his tennis. It's incredible to watch live before your eyes.

I'm glad you're fine.:)

theduh

06-25-2009, 02:14 PM

There is no comparison... yesterday I watched Roger Federer play on Centre Court in person and I was blown away at his tennis. It's incredible to watch live before your eyes.

Man! I want to see him play live as well, no exo's please!. Someone told me that he doesn't look very athletic at all but when the game starts he is a different animal!

Blinkism

06-25-2009, 02:14 PM

Federer, duh!!!

Murray is quite boring, IMO.

And having seen Fed play before, I gotta say he is even better live!!

Murray is not better live, he is worse... at least on hardcourts.

King_Grass

06-25-2009, 02:18 PM

the difference is so abysmal there shouldn't even be a poll about this.

Someone disagrees with you...

Oh, and Federer's slice returns every time is exciting? :roll:

All-rounder

06-25-2009, 02:20 PM

Damn I'm jealous people on this forum have seen federer play live thats just not fair

malakas

06-25-2009, 02:20 PM

Someone disagrees with you...

I can tell you already half of those who will vote for Murray.gj,maximo,veroniquem,theunbalancedTruth,NF, Clydey.:)

King_Grass

06-25-2009, 02:21 PM

Federer, duh!!!

Murray is quite boring, IMO.

And having seen Fed play before, I gotta say he is even better live!!

Murray is not better live, he is worse... at least on hardcourts.

Again someone disagrees with you...

Federer slices every return which = boring.

Also gj011 who voted for Murray... :)

thejoe

06-25-2009, 02:22 PM

I can tell you already half of those who will vote for Murray.gj,maximo,veroniquem,theunbalancedTruth,NF, Clydey.:)

You make that sound like a crime.

LetFirstServe

06-25-2009, 02:22 PM

Damn I'm jealous people on this forum have seen federer play live thats just not fair

when talking live games I guess im 1-0 federer.

All-rounder

06-25-2009, 02:22 PM

I can tell you already half of those who will vote for Murray.gj,maximo,veroniquem,theunbalancedTruth,NF, Clydey.:)
You can cross off gj011 from your checklist :)

tudwell

06-25-2009, 02:23 PM

Yet again, a thread full of Novak-haters who won't give Djokovic any respect.

King_Grass

06-25-2009, 02:23 PM

Yet again, a thread full of Novak-haters who won't give Djokovic any respect.

Huh? :confused:

thejoe

06-25-2009, 02:24 PM

Huh? :confused:

It's a running joke. Don't worry about it.

ChanceEncounter

06-25-2009, 02:26 PM

Murray.

Federer has the prettier game, but you can expect better points with Murray.

tudwell

06-25-2009, 02:27 PM

Huh? :confused:

Just look through a few posts of the only guy who's voted for Murray and you'll understand.

malakas

06-25-2009, 02:27 PM

You make that sound like a crime.

it is as much a crime in taste,as is fed's golden man purse to my eyes.:)

joeri888

06-25-2009, 02:27 PM

To me there's no question. Federer all the way. Everyone can have their own opinion though. Mine is that Murray's game is terrible to watch.

egn

06-25-2009, 02:29 PM

I can't watch Murray I was dying today watching him in a 20 shot slice rally fest with Gulbis that ended with Gulbis missing a slice..I don't know how Murray racks up so many winners he never seems to be hitting offensive shots.

All-rounder

06-25-2009, 02:31 PM

I can't watch Murray I was dying today watching him in a 20 shot slice rally fest with Gulbis that ended with Gulbis missing a slice..I don't know how Murray racks up so many winners he never seems to be hitting offensive shots.
He hits defensive shots which turn out to be winners which makes him a counter puncher

gj011

06-25-2009, 02:34 PM

It's a running joke. Don't worry about it.

It is not a joke, it is trolling. Why are you destroying guy's thread with your nonsense?

I can tell you already half of those who will vote for Murray.gj,maximo,veroniquem,theunbalancedTruth,NF, Clydey.:)

You can cross off gj011 from your checklist :)

Is this a black list of people who are free to be attacked and bashed now?
I am again abused because of how I vote in the polls. Why is there an option for Murray at all, if people are not allowed to vote for him in this poll?
I am felling oppressed because I can't express my free will by voting how I fell, without being abused and harassed by certain posters who are unable to tolerate different opinions. Please stop with that practice.

I simply do not find Federer entertaining at all, hence Murray is more entertaining player to watch for me.

JeMar

06-25-2009, 02:36 PM

You can express your opinion just fine, it's the vitriolic and overly defensive fashion that gets you made fun of in this forum.

gj011

06-25-2009, 02:37 PM

You can express your opinion just fine, it's the vitriolic and overly defensive fashion that gets you made fun of in this forum.

No I can't, it is my different opinion that is not tolerated. It is obvious here.

ChanceEncounter

06-25-2009, 02:37 PM

You can express your opinion just fine, it's the vitriolic and overly defensive fashion that gets you made fun of in this forum.

Bingo !

zagor

06-25-2009, 02:39 PM

Fed for me,not even close.I think Murray is very talented and has an excellent tennis brain but unless he's playing top guys when he steps it up I don't find his tennis particulary entertaining.

Emelia21

06-25-2009, 02:44 PM

Voted for Murray :)

World Beater

06-25-2009, 02:44 PM

murray is fun to watch when he plays the right players otherwise he sort of just pushes his way past regular opponents.

federer is electric even when he plays ggl and lu.

theduh

06-25-2009, 02:44 PM

Damn I'm jealous people on this forum have seen federer play live thats just not fair

Me too. I think I need a hug. :(

Blinkism

06-25-2009, 02:46 PM

murray is fun to watch when he plays the right players otherwise he sort of just pushes his way past regular opponents.

federer is electric even when he plays ggl and lu.

Lately, it seems like Fed plays better against easier opponents than guys in the Top 4.

Hopefully he can find his old form by the semi's so we can see him click against guys like Djokovic and/or Murray.

So far, so good.

Murray, on the other hand, looked average against Kendrick and pushed his way to victory against Gulbis. He'll probably push his way through Troicki and Wawrinka.

thejoe

06-25-2009, 02:59 PM

It is not a joke, it is trolling. Why are you destroying guy's thread with your nonsense?

People derive humour from it, therefore it is a joke. Nonsense? I've contributed to this thread. Have you?

Nadal_Freak

06-25-2009, 03:05 PM

Murray by a long shot. I love his slice and versatility. His effort makes me want to say Vamos like I do with Rafa. :D

Serve_Ace

06-25-2009, 03:16 PM

Did you vote Murray just for the sake of not voting for Roger

All-rounder

06-25-2009, 03:19 PM

Did you vote Murray just for the sake of not voting for Roger
That's a question that no matter what answer is given you will never truly know

vtmike

06-25-2009, 03:35 PM

Murray by a long shot. I love his slice and versatility. His effort makes me want to say Vamos like I do with Rafa. :D

Are you saying Murray is more versatile than Federer?

malakas

06-25-2009, 03:37 PM

so far got 3 out of 7.Should have thought of adding Dutch-guy too!:rolleyes:

FedFan_2009

06-25-2009, 03:38 PM

Federer has humiliated top, top players in semis and finals of slams several times:

Hewitt
Roddick
Nadal
Djokovic
Murray

He doesn't just feast on low-ranked journeymen like Murray!

Dutch-Guy

06-25-2009, 03:41 PM

so far got 3 out of 7.Should have thought of adding Dutch-guy too!:rolleyes:

Adding me where?

malakas

06-25-2009, 03:44 PM

To the anti-Fed list.

kOaMaster

06-25-2009, 03:44 PM

seriously, we don't have to discuss this hear. federer's playstyle is far more attractive except for those who don't like him at all.
tennis-wise, it's obvious.

ChanceEncounter

06-25-2009, 04:06 PM

That's a question that no matter what answer is given you will never truly know
Actually it's a question that you will always know the answer regardless of what is actually answered.

NamRanger

06-25-2009, 04:08 PM

Depends on who's playing who. Watching Federer play Nadal is a total snooze fest.

Watching Murray toy with Djokovic is quite fun however.

FlamEnemY

06-25-2009, 04:08 PM

That would be a better poll:
Federer or Djokovic
or
Murray or rainy day.

I love rain though.

EtePras

06-25-2009, 04:32 PM

No surprise gj011 voted for Murray

Clydey2times

06-25-2009, 04:34 PM

so far got 3 out of 7.Should have thought of adding Dutch-guy too!:rolleyes:

I could have predicted that you would vote for Federer. What's your point?

There are more Federer fans than Murray fans, so this poll was always going to be one-sided. People tend to be glory hunters.

Clydey2times

06-25-2009, 04:35 PM

Actually it's a question that you will always know the answer regardless of what is actually answered.

How did you work that one out?

NamRanger

06-25-2009, 04:36 PM

I could have predicted that you would vote for Federer. What's your point?

There are more Federer fans than Murray fans, so this poll was always going to be one-sided. People tend to be glory hunters.

There's far too many variables for this one. Federer playing against certain opponents is just plain boring (i.e. Karlovic, Nadal, Canas, any grinder really). Watching Murray dismantle someone like Djokovic is fun however.

Clydey2times

06-25-2009, 04:38 PM

There's far too many variables for this one. Federer playing against certain opponents is just plain boring (i.e. Karlovic, Nadal, Canas, any grinder really). Watching Murray dismantle someone like Djokovic is fun however.

It's not something you're going to get an answer to anyway. It's completely subjective. I enjoy watching both of them most of the time.

norbac

06-25-2009, 04:40 PM

Murray easily for me. But opinions are like Tsonga's underwear, everybody has one. I do enjoy watching Federer too though.

NamRanger

06-25-2009, 04:40 PM

It's not something you're going to get an answer to anyway. It's completely subjective. I enjoy watching both of them most of the time.

Exactly. 10 characters.

Ray Mercer

06-25-2009, 04:49 PM

You know that moron Clydey is voting Murray. The guy's one of the biggest haters on the board. Three quarters of his posts are shots at Fed.

ChanceEncounter

06-25-2009, 04:51 PM

How did you work that one out?
Are you really shocked at who Nadal_Freak voted for?

Clydey2times

06-25-2009, 04:51 PM

You know that moron Clydey is voting Murray. The guy's one of the biggest haters on the board. Three quarters of his posts are shots at Fed.

I just said that I enjoy watching Federer play.

I guess everyone who doesn't bow down to Fed is a hater? Grow up, you child.

Guru

06-25-2009, 04:56 PM

I like watching Murray i think he's more exciting than Djokovic or Roddick
but Federer's a legend and you know your watching a master when you see him play.

jamesblakefan#1

06-25-2009, 05:00 PM

I don't like the tone of this thread. It's ok to like Murray's style over Federer, as long as you don't have an irrational hatred For Federer. Don't just call out everyone who votes Murray as Fed haters, guys. That just lowers you to the troll's levels.

Serendipitous

06-25-2009, 05:05 PM

I don't like the tone of this thread. It's ok to like Murray's style over Federer, as long as you don't have an irrational hatred For Federer. Don't just call out everyone who votes Murray as Fed haters, guys. That just lowers you to the troll's levels.

You are a wonderful human being.

ChanceEncounter

06-25-2009, 05:06 PM

I don't like the tone of this thread. It's ok to like Murray's style over Federer, as long as you don't have an irrational hatred For Federer. Don't just call out everyone who votes Murray as Fed haters, guys. That just lowers you to the troll's levels.
I voted for Murray and no one called me out. People are calling out certain posters who obviously have an ulterior motive for voting the way they do.

Ray Mercer

06-25-2009, 05:11 PM

I voted for Murray and no one called me out. People are calling out certain posters who obviously have an ulterior motive for voting the way they do.

Exactly, guy's who should be booted off the site as all they do is turn threads into flame wars.

NF
Gjo
GameSampras
Clydey

there's a few more. I thought some of these guys were banned but apparently they're back.

1st seed alldayy

06-25-2009, 05:14 PM

i say roger because he is an excelent player all around

FedFan_2009

06-25-2009, 05:16 PM

Most entertaining matchup is Fed vs Tsonga!

gj011

06-25-2009, 05:19 PM

Exactly, guy's who should be booted off the site as all they do is turn threads into flame wars.

NF
Gjo
GameSampras
Clydey

there's a few more. I thought some of these guys were banned but apparently they're back.

As I said, Fed fans have started with black lists of posters they don't like and declared an open season on them. Truly sad.

Nadal_Freak

06-25-2009, 05:26 PM

Exactly, guy's who should be booted off the site as all they do is turn threads into flame wars.

NF
Gjo
GameSampras
Clydey

there's a few more. I thought some of these guys were banned but apparently they're back.
Yes anyone that doesn't like Federer should be booted from this forum. :rolleyes: Ever heard of different opinions? It's a good thing to have on a forum I heard.

vtmike

06-25-2009, 08:55 PM

Yes anyone that doesn't like Federer should be booted from this forum. :rolleyes: Ever heard of different opinions? It's a good thing to have on a forum I heard.

Didn't you once say it was blasphemy to not call Nadal God?

Mansewerz

06-25-2009, 08:58 PM

I'm just wondering how people can find his tennis boring.....

Nadal_Freak

06-25-2009, 08:58 PM

Didn't you once say it was blasphemy to not call Nadal God?
It was a joke.

Nadal_Freak

06-25-2009, 09:00 PM

I'm just wondering how people can find his tennis boring.....
Girly movement, ball bashing, big serving, and etc. lead to being boring.

Guru

06-25-2009, 09:00 PM

Most entertaining matchup is Fed vs Tsonga!

Tsonga is overrated. I'd rather see Murray against Hewitt
or Murray play Djokovic, that would be fun... not for Novak though.

I'd like to see Federer spank Novak on grass too.

Blake0

06-25-2009, 09:00 PM

Federer's a shot maker...Murray is more of a tactical player...wonder which type the crould would like to watch more..

Mansewerz

06-25-2009, 09:03 PM

Murray by a long shot. I love his slice and versatility. His effort makes me want to say Vamos like I do with Rafa. :D

Girly movement, ball bashing, big serving, and etc. lead to being boring.

I don't mind that you don't like Federer. But the reasons you give just show that you hate Fed because you like Nadal, and hence you vote against him.

Slice and versatility? You mean the same crap that Fed always does?

If anything, Nadal is more of a ball basher than Federer. Girly movement? Are you serious?

jamesblakefan#1

06-25-2009, 09:05 PM

You are a wonderful human being.

Im not wonderful, just normal and rational. But thanks :)

Threads shouldnt be started w/ the intention of outing people. This one thread isnt gonna change anything, just make things worse. And you shouldnt call out people just for the sake of calling them out. that's just not right. Let the mods do their jobs, Im sure they know who to look out for as trolls.

Nadal_Freak

06-25-2009, 09:05 PM

I don't mind that you don't like Federer. But the reasons you give just show that you hate Fed because you like Nadal, and hence you vote against him.

Slice and versatility? You mean the same crap that Fed always does?

If anything, Nadal is more of a ball basher than Federer. Girly movement? Are you serious?
You asked for my reasons. That and Fed makes it seem so effortless. I prefer my players to look like they are really gutting out their wins.

MAXIMOMMY!!
TROLLING IN A THREAD NEAR YOU! since 07-26-2008
http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m105/bagdaddy_2006/9c0de4d977448b416ad71322a3d63de7.jpg

LOL .

Lion King

06-25-2009, 10:27 PM

Lately, it seems like Fed plays better against easier opponents than guys in the Top 4.

Hopefully he can find his old form by the semi's so we can see him click against guys like Djokovic and/or Murray.

So far, so good.

Murray, on the other hand, looked average against Kendrick and pushed his way to victory against Gulbis. He'll probably push his way through Troicki and Wawrinka.

I heard pushing is not a viable strategy against top-100 ATP players. So if Murray can successfully push his way to No. 3 in the world, he must be really good.

BreakPoint

06-25-2009, 10:44 PM

Girly movement, ball bashing, big serving, and etc. lead to being boring.

Two-handed backhands and grunting loudly when you hit the ball are also "girly" because that's what most of the girls on the WTA do. So I guess that must also make Nadal "girly".

NotSoSuper

06-25-2009, 10:46 PM

Fed by a lot. Murray pushes a little to much for my taste.

BreakPoint

06-25-2009, 10:46 PM

You asked for my reasons. That and Fed makes it seem so effortless. I prefer my players to look like they are really gutting out their wins.

Thanks for admitting that you prefer bad tennis players over great tennis players.

Blinkism

06-25-2009, 10:48 PM

Thanks for admitting that you prefer bad tennis players over great tennis players.

figuring out what "good tennis would be, is subjective.

Blinkism

06-25-2009, 10:50 PM

I heard pushing is not a viable strategy against top-100 ATP players. So if Murray can successfully push his way to No. 3 in the world, he must be really good.

We're discussing who's the most entertaining, not who's really good or not.

Murray can push and play ugly and end up winning Wimbledon, but he'll never be more entertaining than Federer if he keeps playing like this, in my eyes.

BreakPoint

06-25-2009, 10:50 PM

figuring out what &quot;good tennis would be, is subjective.

Great tennis players don't need to gut out their wins. They make it look so effortless. That's what makes them so great.

Blinkism

06-25-2009, 10:52 PM

Great tennis players don't need to gut out their wins. They make it look so effortless. That's what makes them so great.

But, we're talking about entertainment value on this thread so you can't convince someone to change their mind about a player if they don't think they're entertaining.

The poll speaks for itself, IMO.

norbac

06-25-2009, 10:53 PM

Great tennis players don't need to gut out their wins. They make it look so effortless. That's what makes them so great.

So are you saying Nadal's not a great tennis player?

BreakPoint

06-25-2009, 10:55 PM

So are you saying Nadal's not a great tennis player?

That's what Nadal_Freak just said in his post.

GoaLaSSo

06-25-2009, 10:56 PM

murray is just ridiculous sometimes. he sat there all match with gublis pushing and slicing and pushing. it gets old.

federer creates fast action tennis i guess is how i would put it. high energy and lots of movement. Murray is the opposite sometimes

forevertennis

06-25-2009, 10:58 PM

My vote goes for Fed, but Murray's match against Nadal in the USO semis last year was extremely entertaining, IMO.

Blinkism

06-25-2009, 10:59 PM

Oh, c'mon BreakPoint, let people have their own opinion.

Entertainment is subjective.

IMO, though, Nadal and Murray are not equally entertaining. I think Nadal is very entertaining, whereas I think Murray is quite boring. They might both "gut out their victories", but Nadal does it in style, for me.

But we're not talking who's the greater player here, but who's more entertaining. However, I do think the greater player is also the more entertaining player, and apparently 85% of the board agrees.

paulorenzo

06-25-2009, 11:08 PM

That would be a better poll:
Federer or Djokovic
or
Murray or rainy day.

I love rain though.

hahahaha. that was quite humorous.

but indeed, federer or djokovic would be a much tougher decision than murray vs anybody in the top 10.
murray has great court sense, but his strokes are just ugly compared to federer's.

BreakPoint

06-25-2009, 11:08 PM

Oh, c'mon BreakPoint, let people have their own opinion.

I am letting Nadal_Freak have his own opinion. And apparently his opinion is that Federer is a better player than Nadal because he admits that Federer makes winning look so effortless while Nadal has to gut out his wins, and we know only better players are able to making winning look effortless while lesser players have to struggle to gut out their wins.

forevertennis

06-25-2009, 11:16 PM

This all seems like the harmless humor used in the "I do not like federer" thread.
Does anyone know what happened to that thread? hahah.

Blinkism

06-25-2009, 11:31 PM

I am letting Nadal_Freak have his own opinion. And apparently his opinion is that Federer is a better player than Nadal because he admits that Federer makes winning look so effortless while Nadal has to gut out his wins, and we know only better players are able to making winning look effortless while lesser players have to struggle to gut out their wins.

Oh, I thought NF was talking about Murray... If he was talking about Nadal then I fully agree with him.

But, Fed > Murray in entertainment value, IMO.

Nadal is still tops for me, though, but Nadal's technique is only half of his appeal. Like NF, I appreciate his hustle and fight. But, Murray just bores me and irritates me. I'm sorry, the guy might be a great "tactician" (whatever that means) and he might have "good hands" (yeah, so do most pushers) and whatever, but... c'mon...

Murray's Game = old, moldy, stale Bread

Actually, I take that back... I don't want to offend fans of stale bread :)

Tennis_Bum

06-25-2009, 11:52 PM

Lately, it seems like Fed plays better against easier opponents than guys in the Top 4.

Hopefully he can find his old form by the semi's so we can see him click against guys like Djokovic and/or Murray.

So far, so good.

Murray, on the other hand, looked average against Kendrick and pushed his way to victory against Gulbis. He'll probably push his way through Troicki and Wawrinka.

Fed did fine against anyone in top 4. He just hasn't done well before Madrid in master events, but this is slam. I say he will do well at later stage of slams because of the schedule and the way he tighten his game. But I do want him to serve well and tighten his forehand at later stage though. So far, the forehand and serve look good.

P_Agony

06-25-2009, 11:55 PM

Federer is the most entertaining player I've ever watched, so that is my answer. I like Murray too, but I don't find his game very entertaining. I do find it smart however.

Tennis_Bum

06-25-2009, 11:56 PM

Oh, I thought NF was talking about Murray... If he was talking about Nadal then I fully agree with him.

But, Fed > Murray in entertainment value, IMO.

Nadal is still tops for me, though, but Nadal's technique is only half of his appeal. Like NF, I appreciate his hustle and fight. But, Murray just bores me and irritates me. I'm sorry, the guy might be a great "tactician" (whatever that means) and he might have "good hands" (yeah, so do most pushers) and whatever, but... c'mon...

Murray's Game = old, moldy, stale Bread

Actually, I take that back... I don't want to offend fans of stale bread :)

Not to knock on your favorite player, but could it be that Nadal hustles and fights so much because he simply can't do the thing that Fed do. Therefore, he has to do all of the "manual" labor for the wins. I truly believe, if Nadal could beat someone is less the time that usually takes him, he would do so without pretending to grind it out the way he does for most of his matches.

Tennis_Bum

06-26-2009, 12:02 AM

Oh, I thought NF was talking about Murray... If he was talking about Nadal then I fully agree with him.

But, Fed > Murray in entertainment value, IMO.

Nadal is still tops for me, though, but Nadal's technique is only half of his appeal. Like NF, I appreciate his hustle and fight. But, Murray just bores me and irritates me. I'm sorry, the guy might be a great "tactician" (whatever that means) and he might have "good hands" (yeah, so do most pushers) and whatever, but... c'mon...

Murray's Game = old, moldy, stale Bread

Actually, I take that back... I don't want to offend fans of stale bread :)

Did you like Murray strategy against Verdasco at the AO, by doing the drop shot and Verdasco ran up to it and crushed it for a winner and broke the game which he served out the match? How about the match against Gonzo at the FO, when Murray broke serve to stay alive and the subsequently lost the next 4 points on serve, 2 of those points were 1) a drop shot that didn't clear the next at Love-30 and 2) the other point was the forehand that went into the middle of the net at Love-40?

I thought Murray's genius was evident at those two events. Murray was a true genius when he displayed that kind of tennis against Verdasco and Gonzo.

All joking aside, I personally think pushers look only good when they win and even though they win ugly, people like to jump on band wagon and declare them as "genius" or "having great hands". It all a bunch of BS to me. I didn't see people describe Murray as genius or having good hands when he played those stupid points against Verdasco and Gonzo. People can look at the match again to see what I am referring to.

I know I am a minority here, but I think Murray is way overrated.

Blinkism

06-26-2009, 12:04 AM

Not to knock on your favorite player, but could it be that Nadal hustles and fights so much because he simply can't do the thing that Fed do. Therefore, he has to do all of the "manual" labor for the wins. I truly believe, if Nadal could beat someone is less the time that usually takes him, he would do so without pretending to grind it out the way he does for most of his matches.

He doesn't always grind. I mean, not to knock Fed, but the RG 2008 Final (even the whole tourney) was not a grind. He has his longer matches and he's got matches where he absolutely dusts his opponents. The Indian Wells final earlier this year is a good example.

I'm a lefty, so I guess there's something I see in him that some people might miss. I'll admit he doesn't make it look as easy as Federer does, but I think he's very talented and has one of the best forehands of this era. His agility, speed, and stamina are top notch.

Murray has a lot of the same characteristics as Nadal but does it all without any charm, so he often bores tennis fans and he bores me.

Fed, on the other hand, is always easy to watch but until Madrid he must have been a torture to watch for Fed fans. He's not very entertaining when he plays like that, but it looks like he's back to business so he's the most entertaining player at Wimbledon, for me, at the moment.

Murray, on the other hand, is as exciting as watching a glacier race.

P_Agony

06-26-2009, 12:53 AM

I don't like the tone of this thread. It's ok to like Murray's style over Federer, as long as you don't have an irrational hatred For Federer. Don't just call out everyone who votes Murray as Fed haters, guys. That just lowers you to the troll's levels.

You are 100% correct, however you know there are some posers who vote for Murray not because they fancy his game, but rather because of their hatred over Fed. However, I have no problem with that as this is an opinion thread.

Clydey2times

06-26-2009, 01:13 AM

Did you like Murray strategy against Verdasco at the AO, by doing the drop shot and Verdasco ran up to it and crushed it for a winner and broke the game which he served out the match? How about the match against Gonzo at the FO, when Murray broke serve to stay alive and the subsequently lost the next 4 points on serve, 2 of those points were 1) a drop shot that didn't clear the next at Love-30 and 2) the other point was the forehand that went into the middle of the net at Love-40?

I thought Murray's genius was evident at those two events. Murray was a true genius when he displayed that kind of tennis against Verdasco and Gonzo.

All joking aside, I personally think pushers look only good when they win and even though they win ugly, people like to jump on band wagon and declare them as "genius" or "having great hands". It all a bunch of BS to me. I didn't see people describe Murray as genius or having good hands when he played those stupid points against Verdasco and Gonzo. People can look at the match again to see what I am referring to.

I know I am a minority here, but I think Murray is way overrated.

Wow, what an idiotic post.

Should I talk about the many times Federer has played badly and then sarcastically refer to it as his "genius"? Get a grip. You can't isolate one or two matches in which Murray played poorly and then go "See! He's not that good, after all!"

Pretty funny that Murray loses so infrequently these days that you had to bring up a clay court loss. :lol:

joeri888

06-26-2009, 01:15 AM

Murray IS great tactically and a great player overall. It's one of his key attributes that has been often acknowledged by for instance Federer. Wasn't this thread about whether it is ENTERTAINING?

jamesblakefan#1

06-26-2009, 01:24 AM

I dont think it should be our buisness to judge what someone finds entertaining. Its like in football (NFL), some people like high flying passing, while others like smashmouth running game. In basketball, some like run and gun fast paced style, while others like teams that execute in the half court.

Its all opinion, and you shouldnt judge what someone finds entertaining as being inferior to what you find entertaining.

Dutch-Guy

06-26-2009, 02:00 AM

To the anti-Fed list.

Hahaha if you don't kiss Fed's *** like 99% of you do here you're an "anti-Fed". I know that Fed is more entertaining to watch than Murray but i voted for the latter to make the poll look a lil a bit balanced.
One more thing:Fed being more entertaining to watch than Murray is an opinion,not a fact.

mandy01

06-26-2009, 02:09 AM

Fed of course..by a long shot.Unfortunately all I get to see from Murray these days is out-backboarding his opponents.Effective or not,it puts me to sleep.He is still my second fav. to watch but if he continues playing slugfests I'm afraid that will change soon.

malakas

06-26-2009, 02:57 AM

Hahaha if you don't kiss Fed's *** like 99% of you do here you're an "anti-Fed". I know that Fed is more entertaining to watch than Murray but i voted for the latter to make the poll look a lil a bit balanced.
One more thing:Fed being more entertaining to watch than Murray is an opinion,not a fact.

but you still voted for Murray.That says all.:)

having an opinion is a right.But always voting against Fed no matter what,shows too that you're anti Fed.

Dutch-Guy

06-26-2009, 03:13 AM

but you still voted for Murray.That says all.:)
I gave the reason as to why i voted for Murray.
having an opinion is a right.But always voting against Fed no matter what,shows too that you're anti Fed.
Do you have the results and names of people that voted in those polls? And what's your job here:to track down everyone that votes against your idol?

Blinkism

06-26-2009, 03:17 AM

Actually, Dutch-Guy, you can click on the poll (where the numbers of posters are) to see exactly who voted for the poll.

malakas

06-26-2009, 03:17 AM

I gave the reason as to why i voted for Murray.

Do you have the results and names of people that voted in those polls? And what's your job here:to track down everyone that votes against your idol?

Fed isn't my idol.My job here is like everyone else's.To post my opinion.And my opinion is that you and other's are anti-Fed and I posted this.As I can't stop you from having your opinion,you can't stop me from commenting.

Dutch-Guy

06-26-2009, 03:36 AM

Fed isn't my idol.
Fed IS your idol.I've never seen you praise other players as you do with Fed.
My job here is like everyone else's.To post my opinion.And my opinion is that you and other's are anti-Fed and I posted this.As I can't stop you from having your opinion,you can't stop me from commenting.
I don't know how voting against Fed in a poll makes me "anti-Fed".Unlike you, i don't and 'll never let fanboyism cloud my jugement.I've criticized Nadal whose i'm a big supporter of(check the Nadal poor English,time wasting and ranking threads).I've yet to see you do that against your idol.

Dutch-Guy

06-26-2009, 03:40 AM

Actually, Dutch-Guy, you can click on the poll (where the numbers of posters are) to see exactly who voted for the poll.

I know that Blink.My point was how voting against Fed makes one "anti-Fed"?
These Fed fans do the same in "Nadal polls" yet not a single Nadal fan ever complained.

Blinkism

06-26-2009, 03:44 AM

I know that Blink.My point was how voting against Fed makes one "anti-Fed"?
These Fed fans do the same in "Nadal polls" yet not a single Nadal fan ever complained.

Yeah, I've seen that... sometimes on polls that are clearly not Fed related some Fed fans vote in some way that would favor Fed or somehow demean Nadal.

Voting against Fed doesn't making you anti-Fed, as long as you've got a reason.

If you're voting against him in polls out of spite, then yes you're a hater.

Haas_is_GOAT

06-26-2009, 03:45 AM

Federer for me. Can't stand Murray, he's so boring to watch.

FredMurray

06-26-2009, 04:07 AM

Murray for me,he is much more entertaining.Unlike federer who is boring to watch.

malakas

06-26-2009, 04:17 AM

Fed IS your idol.I've never seen you praise other players as you do with Fed.

I don't know how voting against Fed in a poll makes me "anti-Fed".Unlike you, i don't and 'll never let fanboyism cloud my jugement.I've criticized Nadal whose i'm a big supporter of(check the Nadal poor English,time wasting and ranking threads).I've yet to see you do that against your idol.

then you should be more obversant before making conclusions because I cheer for other players countless times and praise them.

I seriously doubt that it hasn't clouded your judgement but whatever you say.:rolleyes:

malakas

06-26-2009, 04:18 AM

Yeah, I've seen that... sometimes on polls that are clearly not Fed related some Fed fans vote in some way that would favor Fed or somehow demean Nadal.

Voting against Fed doesn't making you anti-Fed, as long as you've got a reason.

If you're voting against him in polls out of spite, then yes you're a hater.

that's what I say,and that's the reason I should have included Dutch-hater in the anti-fed list.But whatever he says now..

Giggs The Red Devil

06-26-2009, 04:27 AM

Murray. He’s got more personality on court. But next to Nadal, they’re both Charlie Chaplin. That is unless you’re interested in iatrogenesis.

malakas

06-26-2009, 04:30 AM

Murray. He’s got more personality on court. But next to Nadal, they’re both Charlie Chaplin. That is unless you’re interested in iatrogenesis.

that was a low blow.

gj011

06-26-2009, 04:34 AM

that's what I say,and that's the reason I should have included Dutch-hater in the anti-fed list.But whatever he says now..

Please stop with your pathetic lists. This is a harassment and abuse of people with different opinion. You can not force and bully people to vote only the way you and other Fed fanatics want.

Dutch-Guy

06-26-2009, 04:57 AM

that's what I say,and that's the reason I should have included Dutch-hater in the anti-fed list.But whatever he says now..
Keep your head deep in Fed's behind fanboy.

malakas

06-26-2009, 04:58 AM

what class.

Dutch-Guy

06-26-2009, 04:58 AM

Please stop with your pathetic lists. This is a harassment and abuse of people with different opinion. You can not force and bully people to vote only the way you and other Fed fanatics want.

Co-sign.As if including me on his "anti-Fed list" 'll change my view on his idol.

Blinkism

06-26-2009, 04:59 AM

I don't see what's wrong with being anti-Fed...

This is a tennis forum.. that's what adds to the fun..

If everyone was a Fed fan, then this would be the www.RogerFederer.com forums.

malakas

06-26-2009, 05:12 AM

I don't see what's wrong with being anti-Fed...

This is a tennis forum.. that's what adds to the fun..

If everyone was a Fed fan, then this would be the www.RogerFederer.com forums.

any anti- that shows hatred and radical feelings is wrong imo,but that's up to interpretation.But since gj and Dutch-hater have gone out of their way to prove me wrong,I'll take it they agree it's wrong.Otherwise they would just admit what the whole board knows.:)

sh@de

06-26-2009, 05:23 AM

Federer is more entertaining in my book.

THUNDERVOLLEY

06-26-2009, 05:29 AM

Federer, obviously. He is not a clumsy, childish oaf on court like Murray; Federer actually knows how to use more than the baseline convincingly, has fantastic movement and a visually apparent sense of purpose.

Dutch-Guy

06-26-2009, 05:29 AM

any anti- that shows hatred and radical feelings is wrong imo,but that's up to interpretation.But since gj and Dutch-hater have gone out of their way to prove me wrong,I'll take it they agree it's wrong.Otherwise they would just admit what the whole board knows.:)
malakas,I was already done with you but still bringing my name in your lame ***** posts.
Why don't you open a church where you can worship your jesus Fed?

THUNDERVOLLEY

06-26-2009, 05:32 AM

malacoon,I was already done with you but still bringing my name in your lame ***** posts.
Why don't you open a church where you can worship your jesus Fed?

"coon....?"

Dutch-Guy

06-26-2009, 05:34 AM

"coon....?"

Deleted double post.

Gorecki

06-26-2009, 06:06 AM

Murray by a long shot. I love his slice and versatility. His effort makes me want to say Vamos like I do with Rafa. :D

the more i read your posts the more convinced i get that you only like tennis because it gives you the chance to get back into your Roots as a Texan...

the vamooosing like the cowboys back in the days of Bonanza...

latinking

06-26-2009, 06:44 AM

Not even close!!!!!

Giggs The Red Devil

06-26-2009, 07:08 AM

"coon....?"

Wow, another racist in this board, who would imagine… he could be best friends with Leublu_Tennis and his vile anti-Semitism.

THUNDERVOLLEY

06-26-2009, 07:36 AM

Please stop with your pathetic lists. This is a harassment and abuse of people with different opinion. You can not force and bully people to vote only the way you and other Fed fanatics want.

Your history here is one of harrassing/flaming others who do not worship the Serbian players, but offer their own opinons. Try not to drown in your own pathetic hypocrisy,

THUNDERVOLLEY

06-26-2009, 07:43 AM

Deleted double post.

It was already too late to edit your offensive emphasis, (not to mention the Jesus line) since I quoted your original post.....

malacoon,I was already done with you but still bringing my name in your lame ***** posts.
Why don't you open a church where you can worship your jesus Fed?

.....which remains to be seen by all..but you had to realize that?

boogywhip

06-26-2009, 07:46 AM

Murry is pretty boring to watch.

malakas

06-26-2009, 07:48 AM

Wow, another racist in this board, who would imagine… he could be best friends with Leublu_Tennis and his vile anti-Semitism.

wow what does this coon means???!!
Silly me,I thought he wanted to call me a racoon or smth :/

mikethehamster

06-26-2009, 07:49 AM

is this a joke thread?

Nadal_Freak

06-26-2009, 08:19 AM

Oh, c'mon BreakPoint, let people have their own opinion.

Entertainment is subjective.

IMO, though, Nadal and Murray are not equally entertaining. I think Nadal is very entertaining, whereas I think Murray is quite boring. They might both "gut out their victories", but Nadal does it in style, for me.

But we're not talking who's the greater player here, but who's more entertaining. However, I do think the greater player is also the more entertaining player, and apparently 85% of the board agrees.
Murray is nowhere near as entertaining as Nadal but he is more entertaining than that boring Federer guy. And I found his last match against Gulbis very entertaining. And Breakpoint is a troll like Drakulie and Namranger so no surprise he tried to twist the truth of my post.

Serve_Ace

06-26-2009, 08:21 AM

Murray is nowhere near as entertaining as Nadal but he is more entertaining than that boring Federer guy. And I found his last match against Gulbis very entertaining. And Breakpoint is a troll like Drakulie and Namranger so no surprise he tried to twist the truth of my post.

So you like players to fight out every single point....how about the FO this year in the semi final Federer-Del potro, surely you found that exciting then

Nadal_Freak

06-26-2009, 08:24 AM

So you like players to fight out every single point....how about the FO this year in the semi final Federer-Del potro, surely you found that exciting then
I knew Del Potro would choke. Watching Del Potro against Federer always makes me sick the way DP bows down to his biggest hero. Pathetic.

VivalaVida

06-26-2009, 08:26 AM

Federer vs Backboard Murrray? Ha! Federer by country mile!

Serve_Ace

06-26-2009, 08:28 AM

I knew Del Potro would choke. Watching Del Potro against Federer always makes me sick the way DP bows down to his biggest hero. Pathetic.

Yeah, but what about the tennis.

Nadal_Freak

06-26-2009, 08:30 AM

Yeah, but what about the tennis.
Not my style. Too much flat hitting but it was high quality for 3 sets. Until DP decided he shouldn't be playing this well and fell apart.

THUNDERVOLLEY

06-26-2009, 08:33 AM

is this a joke thread?

Any attempt to place the oaf Murray in any sort of consideration with Federer is a joke that keeps on giving.

Serve_Ace

06-26-2009, 08:36 AM

Not my style. Too much flat hitting but it was high quality for 3 sets. Until DP decided he shouldn't be playing this well and fell apart.

Nah I don't think he decided not to play well, who would??? Especially when your first Grand Slam title is on the line, Del Potro needs to work on his fitness thats all, so he can have high quality 5 sets. Oh I see why you choose Murray, but doesn't Murray hit flat?

Nadal_Freak

06-26-2009, 08:41 AM

Nah I don't think he decided not to play well, who would??? Especially when your first Grand Slam title is on the line, Del Potro needs to work on his fitness thats all, so he can have high quality 5 sets. Oh I see why you choose Murray, but doesn't Murray hit flat?
Murray's forehand has a lot of loop on it and his backhand is a very good slice to it. He is far from a flat hitter. Otherwise, Fed would own him like he does with Del Potro.

BreakPoint

06-26-2009, 05:38 PM

Murray is nowhere near as entertaining as Nadal but he is more entertaining than that boring Federer guy. And I found his last match against Gulbis very entertaining. And Breakpoint is a troll like Drakulie and Namranger so no surprise he tried to twist the truth of my post.
Sure, that's why so far, 86% of the voters think "that boring Federer guy" is more entertaining. :oops:

It's all opinion buddy, I also think Murray is much more enjoyable to watch than Fed.

BreakPoint

06-26-2009, 05:59 PM

It's all opinion buddy, I also think Murray is much more enjoyable to watch than Fed.
Sure, that's why there are knowledgeable expert opinions and then there are layman's opinions. :shock:

Nadal_Freak

06-26-2009, 06:00 PM

Sure, that's why there are knowledgeable expert opinions and then there are layman's opinions. :shock:
Agreed. Yours would be layman's opinions. Borderline trolling.

norbac

06-26-2009, 06:06 PM

Sure, that's why there are knowledgeable expert opinions and then there are layman's opinions. :shock:

So you're dissing other people's opinions because they don't agree with yours? Cool.

BreakPoint

06-26-2009, 06:08 PM

So you're dissing other people's opinions because they don't agree with yours? Cool.
No, because they don't agree with all the experts. Take a survey of tennis pundits and see how many think Murray is more entertaining than Federer.

Nadal_Freak

06-26-2009, 06:08 PM

So you're dissing other people's opinions because they don't agree with yours? Cool.
More people like Britney Spears over Boston as well. Does that make Britney Spears better than Boston? Nope. Just more popular.

BreakPoint

06-26-2009, 06:10 PM

Agreed. Yours would be layman's opinions. Borderline trolling.
I would not consider the opinion of someone who doesn't play tennis and who lives in his parent's basement to be a "knowledgeable expert opinion". :(

Nadal_Freak

06-26-2009, 06:11 PM

I would not consider the opinion of someone who doesn't play tennis and who lives in his parent's basement to be a "knowledgeable expert opinion". :(
I do play tennis. Quit because of tendinitis. It's a pain. I know a lot about the sport.

samprasvsfederer123

06-26-2009, 06:12 PM

federer, murray is too cold i've seen him in interviews, its like if they're gonna kill him after the interview, hes always so depressed

norbac

06-26-2009, 06:12 PM

No, because they don't agree with all the experts. Take a survey of tennis pundits and see how many think Murray is more entertaining than Federer.

They may be experts opinions, but its just that: an opinion, not a fact.

Oh and by the way Boston>>>>Spears.

BreakPoint

06-26-2009, 06:28 PM

I do play tennis. Quit because of tendinitis. It's a pain. I know a lot about the sport.
Have you been playing and watching pro tennis for over 35 years like most experts have?

BreakPoint

06-26-2009, 06:29 PM

Oh and by the way Boston>>>>Spears.
I'm not sure what that even means? :confused:

NamRanger

06-26-2009, 06:31 PM

I do play tennis. Quit because of tendinitis. It's a pain. I know a lot about the sport.

"Nadal's forehand has a similar motion to a bicep curl"

Please do feel free to tell that to any USTA certified coach, and don't feel bad when they laugh at you.

Nadal_Freak

06-26-2009, 06:34 PM

"Nadal's forehand has a similar motion to a bicep curl"

Please do feel free to tell that to any USTA certified coach, and don't feel bad when they laugh at you.
Yes because his shot requires coming up on it a lot. It's not the traditional hitting straight side ways which doesn't put much spin on it. Do that 5 hours a day on clay and you work your bicep a lot. Of course it works your shoulder, wrist, and legs as well but I could see why he is built like he is.

NamRanger

06-26-2009, 06:35 PM

Yes because his shot requires coming up on it a lot. It's not the tradition hitting straight side ways which doesn't put much spin on it. Do that 5 hours a day on clay and you work your bicep a lot. Of course it works your should, wrist, and legs as well but I could see why he is built like he is.

See, this is why me, Drak, and BP know for sure you are not a very good tennis player. Nadal's reverse forehand is not a normal reverse forehand like a Sampras, or anyone else.

Is there a large vertical component? Yes. However, there is a very big horizontal component too, which separates Nadal's forehand from every other reverse forehand out there. Plus, if you actually knew anything about tennis, you would also know that Nadal's forehand is not powered by his biceps in the slightest of bit.

Nadal_Freak

06-26-2009, 06:39 PM

See, this is why me, Drak, and BP know for sure you are not a very good tennis player. Nadal's reverse forehand is not a normal reverse forehand like a Sampras, or anyone else.

Is there a large vertical component? Yes. However, there is a very big horizontal component too, which separates Nadal's forehand from every other reverse forehand out there. Plus, if you actually knew anything about tennis, you would also know that Nadal's forehand is not powered by his biceps in the slightest of bit.
Why are the claycourters tend to be built more in the biceps compared to hardcourters?

NamRanger

06-26-2009, 06:43 PM

Why are the claycourters tend to be built more in the biceps compared to hardcourters?

Conjuncture. Irrelevant to the discussion.

Nadal_Freak

06-26-2009, 06:47 PM

Conjuncture. Irrelevant to the discussion.
It is relevant. Almagro, Moya, Verdasco, and etc. are very strong in the biceps. They work their upper body more due to clay courts relying on high shots and more topspin being effective.

NamRanger

06-26-2009, 06:58 PM

It is relevant. Almagro, Moya, Verdasco, and etc. are very strong in the biceps. They work their upper body more due to clay courts relying on high shots and more topspin being effective.

It is not relevant to the discussion. We are talking about Nadal, not every clay court player in the world.

And again, you simply just do not understand tennis at all as usual.

A. There are plenty of successful clay court players who are not muscular in the upper body. Federer, Djokovic, Gustavo Kuerten, Muster, Borg, Young Agassi, etc.

B. There are plenty of hardcourt specialists that are extremely muscular all around and even bigger than some of the clay court specialists you listed (Verdasco and Moya are not clay specialists btw), including Blake, Roddick, Haas, Safin, Murray, etc.

ChanceEncounter

06-26-2009, 07:17 PM

It is relevant. Almagro, Moya, Verdasco, and etc. are very strong in the biceps. They work their upper body more due to clay courts relying on high shots and more topspin being effective.
Oh dear, here's the whole "Nadal's forehand is like a bicep curl" crap again.

Ask any kinesiologist out there. They will disagree with you.

stanfordtennis alum

06-26-2009, 07:21 PM

federer--GOAT

icedevil0289

06-26-2009, 07:39 PM

wait, since when was fed considered a ball basher?

norbac

06-26-2009, 07:40 PM

I'm not sure what that even means? :confused:

Lol, just read one of NF's earlier posts.

NamRanger

06-26-2009, 08:13 PM

wait, since when was fed considered a ball basher?

Since the all knowing Nadal_Freak said so.

FedFan_2009

06-26-2009, 08:14 PM

I thought we were past the point when we listen to what trolls say.

Fedgasm

06-26-2009, 08:19 PM

Federer by a mile and a half.

BreakPoint

06-26-2009, 10:11 PM

More people like Britney Spears over Boston as well. Does that make Britney Spears better than Boston? Nope. Just more popular.
If more people like Britney Spears than Boston then more people must find Britney Spears more entertaining than Boston. Logic 101.

The-Champ

06-26-2009, 10:25 PM

If more people like Britney Spears than Boston then more people must find Britney Spears more entertaining than Boston. Logic 101.

Actually what you said is very illogical. It's called argumentum ad populum.

What you've proven here is that more people "find" a certain type of player more entertaining. In this context, numbers do not equate truth/fact, because this is not a mathematical equation.

The topic is, "who is more entertaining"? Maybe we should define entertainment first.

Nadal_Freak

06-26-2009, 10:33 PM

I thought we were past the point when we listen to what trolls say.
Well I don't think you want to get ignored. lol

BreakPoint

06-26-2009, 11:00 PM

Actually what you said is very illogical. It's called argumentum ad populum.

What you've proven here is that more people "find" a certain type of player more entertaining. In this context, numbers do not equate truth/fact, because this is not a mathematical equation.

The topic is, "who is more entertaining"? Maybe we should define entertainment first.
Um...if Michael Jackson sells 700 million records, I think you can safely assume that lots of people find his music entertaining. That is a fact. Logic 101.

In this thread, we are asking if more people find Federer or Murray more entertaining. Just take a look at the poll results, so far. Based on these poll results, you can safely assume that if Federer and Murray were playing at the same time in the same tournament on neutral courts (maybe in the U.S.), the stadium Federer is playing in would be packed while the stadium Murray is playing in would be nearly empty with a echo every time he hits the ball. More people would choose to see Federer than to see Murray. Logic 101.

FedFan_2009

06-26-2009, 11:06 PM

Um...if Michael Jackson sells 700 million records, I think you can safely assume that lots of people find his music entertaining. That is a fact. Logic 101.

In this thread, we are asking if more people find Federer or Murray more entertaining. Just take a look at the poll results, so far. Based on these poll results, you can safely assume that if Federer and Murray were playing at the same time in the same tournament on neutral courts (maybe in the U.S.), the stadium Federer is playing in would be packed while the stadium Murray is playing in would be nearly empty with a echo every time he hits the ball. More people would choose to see Federer than to see Murray. Logic 101.

That doesn't mean Federer's tennis is more exciting. It could be that Murray's junkballing style excites the masses FAR more. :shock:

rommil

06-26-2009, 11:07 PM

I do play tennis. Quit because of tendinitis. It's a pain. I know a lot about the sport.

This desperately almost sounds like begging....

BreakPoint

06-26-2009, 11:10 PM

That doesn't mean Federer's tennis is more exciting. It could be that Murray's junkballing style excites the masses FAR more. :shock:
Huh? 87% of the people here say otherwise.

If Federer's tennis wasn't exciting but instead boring as compared to Murray's game, I don't think 87% of the people would find him more entertaining to watch than Murray. Logic 101.

FedFan_2009

06-26-2009, 11:12 PM

Huh? 87% of the people here say otherwise.

If Federer's tennis wasn't exciting but instead boring as compared to Murray's game, I don't think 87% of the people would find him more entertaining to watch than Murray. Logic 101.

Don't the masses love winning more? Nadal and Murray keep beating Federer because they get everything back, and Federer can't make enough flashy winners to offset all the errors.

rommil

06-26-2009, 11:19 PM

Don't the masses love winning more? Nadal and Murray keep beating Federer because they get everything back, and Federer can't make enough flashy winners to offset all the errors.

Depends on which masses you are talking about, the casual tennis spectators or the fans that play tennis as well. Head to head yes, it doesn't favor Roger against those two but add both Murray's and Nadal's accomplishments on GS they don't even equal half of Roger's titles.

BreakPoint

06-26-2009, 11:20 PM

Don't the masses love winning more? Nadal and Murray keep beating Federer because they get everything back, and Federer can't make enough flashy winners to offset all the errors.
Even though Murray has beaten Federer the last 4 times in a row, 87% of the people still find Federer to be more entertaining to watch than Murray. It's not about who wins or who loses. It's about who has the more entertaining game to watch. Even if Federer never won another match in his career, I would still find his game more entertaining to watch than the vast majority of ATP pros.

The-Champ

06-26-2009, 11:51 PM

Um...if Michael Jackson sells 700 million records, I think you can safely assume that lots of people find his music entertaining. That is a fact. Logic 101.

In this thread, we are asking if more people find Federer or Murray more entertaining. Just take a look at the poll results, so far. Based on these poll results, you can safely assume that if Federer and Murray were playing at the same time in the same tournament on neutral courts (maybe in the U.S.), the stadium Federer is playing in would be packed while the stadium Murray is playing in would be nearly empty with a echo every time he hits the ball. More people would choose to see Federer than to see Murray. Logic 101.

On Michael Jackson...Yes, 700 million record sales would mean, lots of people find him entertaining. But, have you ever considered that maybe there are 1 billion fans of The Doors who can't afford to buy the group's record? How about that logic? How come "Thriller" album has sold more than "Blood on the Dance Floor"? Was Jackson not as entertaining then? Anyway, you can't judge who is more entertaining, on numbers. Entertainment is different for everyone, and that's the truth.

Again, the only thing you have proven here is that many people define the word "entertainment" the same way? Your logic claims that, because many people define it that way, then it must be defined that way, and therefore it should be the truth. That my friend is illogical.

orangettecoleman

06-27-2009, 12:18 AM

Fed is always flashy and entertaining. Murray is flashy when he needs to be. Both totally legit approaches, but definitely Fed is more fun to watch.

FedFan_2009

06-27-2009, 12:19 AM

Well the end result is all the matters.

Slams won:

Fed - 14
Murray - 0

orangettecoleman

06-27-2009, 12:20 AM

never mind

maximo

06-27-2009, 12:22 AM

Murray of course, Federer is booorriiinngg

malakas

06-27-2009, 12:23 AM

Murray of course, Federer is booorriiinngg

and now the puzzle is complete!!!:D

BreakPoint

06-27-2009, 12:26 AM

On Michael Jackson...Yes, 700 million record sales would mean, lots of people find him entertaining. But, have you ever considered that maybe there are 1 billion fans of The Doors who can't afford to buy the group's record? How about that logic? How come "Thriller" album has sold more than "Blood on the Dance Floor"? Was Jackson not as entertaining then? Anyway, you can't judge who is more entertaining, on numbers. Entertainment is different for everyone, and that's the truth.

Again, the only thing you have proven here is that many people define the word "entertainment" the same way? Your logic claims that, because many people define it that way, then it must be defined that way, and therefore it should be the truth. That my friend is illogical.
Um...why didn't all those millions of people buy 700 million Doors records instead of Michael Jackson records then? You're not making any sense. People have a choice what to spend their money on. They chose to spend their money on Micheal Jackson records instead of Doors records because they find Michael Jackson's music more entertaining. If people found The Doors music more entertaining, then The Doors would have sold 700 million records and not Michael Jackson. Logic 101.

FedFan_2009

06-27-2009, 12:31 AM

Um...why didn't all those millions of people buy 700 million Doors records instead of Michael Jackson records then? You're not making any sense. People have a choice what to spend their money on. They chose to spend their money on Micheal Jackson records instead of Doors records because they find Michael Jackson's music more entertaining. If people found The Doors music more entertaining, then The Doors would have sold 700 million records and not Michael Jackson. Logic 101.

Yet The Doors is superior music.

BreakPoint

06-27-2009, 12:42 AM

Yet The Doors is superior music.
It doesn't matter how "superior" their music is if more people find MJ's music more entertaining.

FedFan_2009

06-27-2009, 12:44 AM

It doesn't matter how "superior" their music is if more people find MJ's music more entertaining.

It does to me. I listen to The Doors, but not MJ.

BreakPoint

06-27-2009, 12:48 AM

It does to me. I listen to The Doors, but not MJ.
But you're in the minority. Isn't that the point of this thread?

Cesc Fabregas

06-27-2009, 12:50 AM

I like Federer's game better but Murray's game is intresting.

galactico

06-27-2009, 01:04 AM

murray's game isn't entertaining at all. his body language put you off him, no charisma, and there isn't a weapon in his game that is great.

FedFan_2009

06-27-2009, 01:04 AM

Murray is a more tactical player because he can't hit kill shots with the regularity that Fed does. Believe me, if suddenly you took away Fed's kill shots, he'd start junkballing too!

TheNatural

06-27-2009, 01:46 AM

Federer's service games are more entertaining but Murray's return games are more entertaining.

Kore

06-27-2009, 02:03 AM

Murray for sure!! more longer rallies, unpredictable shots and tactics! Fed just steams through the matches and blows players away which is boring to watch. lol. even tho fed is awesome.

CocaCola

06-27-2009, 05:38 AM

Is this a joke...Fed by a mile.

icedevil0289

06-27-2009, 07:06 AM

Since the all knowing Nadal_Freak said so.

Hey if people find him boring, fine with me. However, to call him a ball basher, that's just silly imo.